GameBanshee Forums

I have read many post how people defend their character or strategies by claiming it to be "role-playistic". [Well, some just say "Heck, I powergame and that's it!"] I think most of us play the game as it is intended - a CPRG. No need to point it out. [I guess someone will do that anyway.] There is a huge difference between PnP and CRPG but it is possible to role play a CRPG. It's all in your mind.

But what is role playing? What defines role playing is a CRPG? Well, to be more specific - BGII.

From what I have read in this forum role playing can be:

• No save game, but resting a lot. In "real" life an adventurer/-es would rest and be prepared before entering a monsters abode (for ex.)
• Resting when possible. The character is in a hurry (most of the time) and thus no time for excessive sleeping. The world must be saved today.
• Deciding a personality for your character and stick to it. Even though it means missed quests, xp and magical stuff.
• Go with the storyline without deverging to other side quests. Even though it means missed quests, xp and magical stuff.
• All of the above. Hardcore. Only for the hardcore role players.

It hit me reading "No deaths, no reloads...", searching for all the cool stuff cannot be considered role playing. It doesn't matter if you solo or have a party. I good role play would be sticking to the story i.e. Imoen, your best friend (maybe), is taken away. You have to rescue her. I doubt that any of us would linger to rescue our best friend just to search the town for usable stuff. After the Underdark there is no time to take it easy. Irenicus must be stopped, and quickly.

I have only played characters with a personality [some with less than others] and reloaded when things didn't go my way. [When the monsters/villains made ketchup out of me]. To play "Hardcore" would be fun although I would probably die rather fast. Maybe something for those who really want a challange?


JUST AS YOU KNOW...
BGII is a CRPG [has this eluded someone?]. Anyone should play as it fit's him/her to make the game enjoyable. [I think this has been said about a 1000 times but, well...]

I am just curious how this communty interprets "role play". Those two words are used frequently on this forum so I wanted to know what people thought about it.

Your opinions?

I think you have to realize that many people who play crpg's are not people who have played PnP's before. They have not had the sadness of actually having a character die and creating a new one. They have not had a DM keeping up with their decisions about roleplaying their alignment. Just reload and try again.
I'm not a purist, sometimes you will need to reload and have same games to prevent the inevitable bug. However, on the computer I feel you should do this as little as possible. However the way CRPG's are created it is rapid fire monsters and less in the way of gaining exp. for role playing. Therefore on the computer you have to take a little of the power gamer approach(i.e. how will you kill the demi-lich without a +5 sword or the knowledge of which spells will affect it. you can get massacred for two years before you would figure this out on your own.)
Besides anyone who plays RPG's on the computer or otherwise must admit that seeing your characters become powerful is fun. We just want it to be well deserved. In a
CRPG level advancement come fast and furious. In PnP it may take to or three gaming sessions for your characters to level(i.e. ten hours)in a crpg it may happen in 30 minutes. I think this takes some of the excitement out of level advancement and makes CRPG'ers take it for granted. Remeber in DnD when you had to go to a trainer to rise in level. No such thing in CRPG just click and rise. This is one thing from which CRPG's could benefit. This would tend to make you rely on wits instead of brawn.
I guess what I am saying is that CRPG's are not relly RPG's at all. They are RPG like adventure games. (No slam intended to BG II's makers b/c the game kicks ass as can be seen by the # of posts on this message board) You will never adequately recreate long hours of dice rolling, pizza munching laughing, doing silly things with your character at 3 in the morning etc. But with this all absorbing choose your own adventure game you can still have a lot of fun and try to play tyour charactre the way you believe he/she would behave. The main difference is the ultimate freedom you have as a PnP player. You do not have to follow the DM's story line if you do not want and this is where some of the greatest fun comes in!

I think that tabletop RPG is more open ended. You can say whatever you like as long as it fits your character's personality. In most CRPGs, your dialogue is preset for you. There is only three or four choices in each dialogue such as in BG2. You don't really get to play your character because they are set up to say or act certain things. It is true that the pre setup conversations consist of choices between good, evil, and neutral, but if you are playing PnP, you get to be more liberal. One day I hope that they will make the AI smarter, so that when you type in something, it will respond to it. For example, you go up to Jaheira and type "i want to rescue you, but I have to find the magic key first", then the AI would figure out what to say next.

I feel CRPGs are too restrictive to allow for good roleplaying. You are limited in both dialogue and action options (no climbing walls, no distracting people, very little information gathering). Enemy AI is crappy, which does not force you to adapt to clever setups or ploys, but instead allows you to run the same routine over and over. Most of all (and this is the real killer for me), no discussion with party members. Sure, there are some scripted dialogues, but there's no debating about, say, the next step. All this suspends disbelief for me to the extent that I see the game as some sort of Diablo clone with some very nice extra features (bits of plot, sidequests, NPCs that say some lines). I think the BG series is the closest match to PnP RPG-ing so far, but it is still a loooong way off. Maybe Neverwinter Nights will reach another level.

All good and interesting points. I agree that CRPG are not even close to PnP but I think it is possible to roleplay in BGII. Do anyone remember those books looong time ago, where every page gave the reader a choice how to advance in the story?
("You encounter an ogre. It is guarding a bif oak door. Do you: 1.Run, 2.Attack" etc).
It is similar in BGII, predetermined questions and answers but by applying "house-rules" to BGII the role play experience can be enhanced.

Underdog wrote:

when I am playing BG and my characters level up I don't click on it while we are out adventuring, I wait and level up my characters when we are back at an inn and resting and training in between forays.

[I am not yet skilled using the UBB.]

I like the idea of not leveling up until being able to rest or reaching an inn or the main characters stronghold. It is much closer to PnP already (compared to other games) but also there is possible to widen the experience. In some other "CRPG" that is not even possible. Take Diablo par example, how to play that game more like PnP? [I fail to see why Diablo is called a CRPG-it is crap!]

So, PnP is so much more rewarding than CRPG but by applying PnP ideas to the game it becomes more alive.

Last time I play PnP D&D was about ten years ago, maybe more. Since then I have mostly played more "adult" games like, COC, Kult and World of darkness games. I all these games, I cant remember ever rolling a dice, if one was ever rolled, it was the DM who did it.
So when I play BG2, I have a really hard time taking it serious as a role playing game. For me its just a adventure, nothing more. D&D as a role playing game doesnt really appeal to me, there are just too many "rules" you must follow in order to play the game. Especially character creation, all of this can use and cant use, must be Lawful good, must be human, must be etc. Instead of just saying, cant cast magic while wearing armor, cant shoot a arrow with fule plate. Also, the fact that theives are the only class that can steal also makes me laugh, are you trying to tell me that just because your a fighter you can never learn to spot traps? pick a pocket? I would much rather create my character like this:

Race=Human
Sex=Male
Age=20
Alignment=Fights for the cause of good.
CurrentOccupation=fx: Knight in holy order
therest=just pick some skills, some should be dependante of others.. some should be cheaper then others because of what you are currently doing in your life.

and after that, if you want to learn something, you gotta try it out first. Sure you could go to a trainer, but you get the best EXP from the real world. I would say that after going trough BG2 my fighter should atleast have 50 points in spot traps. What to learn a new sword?, pick it up and start fighting. This shouldnt be all that hard to implement in BG/NWN, you need a certain amout of exp with a sword to become grand master with it.
Thats what I call Roleplaying and what is the need for level ups.. you dont get better because your level 10, you just have more exp.

My 2 cent rante on the subject.. now flame away

Originally posted by Firecc:
<STRONG>Do anyone remember those books looong time ago, where every page gave the reader a choice how to advance in the story?
("You encounter an ogre. It is guarding a bif oak door. Do you: 1.Run, 2.Attack" etc).</STRONG>

Yup! They were great Of course, not real roleplaying (dying because of a wrong move tends to make you swallow your ego), but pretty close as books get.

Originally posted by Firecc:
<STRONG>I fail to see why Diablo is called a CRPG</STRONG>

That would be because of the... ah... character development. Which it does have, compared to a game like Quake or Tomb Raider, where you also control a character. Still, that merely makes it an action game with character development in my book, not a CRPG.

How remarkable...
My first question is about if PnP really has exclusive rights on term "role playing".
IMO we're role playing all the way and started even before we've learnt the word "role". Cowboys and Indians, dolls, good/bad boy/girl ... Didn't we? All with some strict ruleset, even if we never pay attention to that.
Well, BG has grown from PnP, although it have never completely accepted all set of rules. It has been due to technical restrictions partially and other considerable reasons abowe technical. You should never expect the movie would be the same as book, it's very rare even if they are on one level. If they do, most probably the movie is an independent work and have the story only as an inspiration. So i see BG and PnP games that way.
IMHO roleplaying is when we're assuming another person's life, character and environment. So it doesn't matter how hard rules one set for oneself, the emotion is the essence. You imagine another life and try it on you. Even powergamers do, thought in slightly different light, because the feel of power is dominant there. The game only sets the ground and rules for one to live in, no more. Our own rules are just part of our roleplaying.
As for fast growth of characters, it's one of aspects of BG i enjoy very much
Just MHO,
L.

[ 07-17-2001: Message edited by: Loredweller ]

@Firecc, I agree: the way many of us (including myself) like to look about and accept every possible alternate path to our own can be perceived as the role of a tourist, rather than that of an adventurer. But in one sense, would a wet-behind-the-ears adventurer decide to go straight for the black castle of Evil Lord Grim? Or would he first decide to pick up some skills, preparing himself from some final confrontation?

On the matter of PnP RPGs and CRPGs: no contest. PnP has the computer beat, hands down, if you want in-your-face RPGing with all the details and fun. That said, if you don't expect a PnP RPG when you play BG2 or P:T, you can have a hell of a lot of fun.

Good discussions! Good points.

My first question is about if PnP really has exclusive rights on term "role playing".

No, but in this context... uhm, yes. CRPG will never be as good as PnP (IMO) although I beleive it will get fairly close. I have hight expectations on NWN.

IMHO roleplaying is when we're assuming another person's life, character and environment. So it doesn't matter how hard rules one set for oneself, the emotion is the essence.

I agree, but I doubt powergamers or even role playing fanatics feel with the character while playing CPRG. If a groupmember dies it is an asset that has to be replaced, not the feeling of a friend that dies. That feeling is so much easier to get while playing PnP (but even then it is not even close to real life). My point is that if a player get the emotion thing right, certain actions would never, or rarely, occur. Like Kangaxx par example. No touristing, instead focusing on rescuing a life time friend and after that rescuing ones soul. Putting together a dead Lich just to get xp and a cool ring would not be on my priority list.

Well, role playing BGII should not be confused with playing BGII. With that I mean the fun to explore every single tiny thing Bioware came up with, compared to playing the character according as to a real life situation. I enjoy to explore the game, to see what treasure they came up with, to have über cool equipment and to rise in levels. But, I enjoy to role play much more. To take decisions according to the characters personality.

But in one sense, would a wet-behind-the-ears adventurer decide to go straight for the black castle of Evil Lord Grim? Or would he first decide to pick up some skills, preparing himself from some final confrontation?

True, a "Wet-behind-ears adventurer" would not go straight to Evil Lord Grim (I like the name... 'Lord Grim'). But I do not consider a lvl 7 and up character a beginner. For BG1 I totally agree since a newbie almost dies by drinking coffee (real coffee, strong swedish type of coffee. Not the watery called-coffee-but-not-even-close coffee that is served in American restaurants). But for BGII? No.

Another thing, if I where to pick up skill and equipment I would choose a safe way. The character's ultimate goal (according to the story in SoA), is to defeat Irenicus. I would not go chasing after dragons, liches or other very dangerous creaturs.

Wow, you really mean that you feel a deep deep sadness when Minsc, Aerie or somebody else in your party is blown to pieces beyond resurection? If you do I am impressed (and a little bit worried).

I expressed myself badly in my last post. My fault, sorry about that.

There is always an emotional connection to a NPC. It can be that the NPC's personality fits with the rest of the group or the player value on the NPC's combat ablities. Or both.

Still, I firmly believe that few players feel emotional attached towards a NPC. If the main character dies or a NPC is blown to bits you can just reload. I have used it several times. (These damn monsters just can't leave me alone.) That feature does take away some of the sadness since the NPC then never was lost - unless you play hardcore. In PnP a NPC (or fellow player character) who dies is dead. No reloads. Therefor a deeper feeling of sadness.

When Aerie is blown to pieces for the 30th time it becomes tedious. I don't feel much sadness, I just reload. Although I keep my NPCs because of their interaction with other NPCs in my group, the attachment is not more than that. Their interaction makes my gaming experience tenfold. I love Mazzy and Aerie's dialoges as they try to comfort each other. Great fun. But when they die I don't stop playing for 5 minutes unless it is to refine my strategy. (In my PnP group everything stops for about 5 minutes when a player character dies. The shock I think.)

If I would play hardcore, with no reloads, no over-resting, no touristing, the experience would probalby be a different one. One closer to the PnP experience. I'll try that, but first I will finish ToB.

For me the difference between PnP and CRPG is very, very big and in CPRG all characters, even my own character, is judged a little as an asset. (Maybe asset isn't a very good word for it but..) The lack of social interaction tilts the game over towards combat. In combat success is the only option. So I can understand powergames who have "good" characters who let "evil" characters join just because they are better (or at least they think that). No one can say that BGII is social encounter heavy. (I must add that I think Bioware did a great job creating the BG series. I never played a game so much as the BG series.)

I am trying to get as close to the PnP experience I have. I think that takes an effort to get there but I also think the reward makes up for it.